1
IN THE COURT OF GUARDIAN JUDGE, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
ISLAMABAD.
Mst. Samia Naz Daughter of Fazal Hussain R/o Post office Khas,
Shadiwal, chuherke, Tehsil & District Gujrat.
…Petitioner
Versus
1. Maqsood Ahmed Son of Manzoor Hussain.
2. Muhammad Aneeb Ahmed. Son aged about 12 years
3. Muhammad Haseeb Ahmed. Son aged about 10 years.
R/o House # 443, Street # 02, Phase 5-A, Kalma Chauk, Ghauri
Town, Islamabad.
…Respondents
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 25 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS
ACT FOR THE CUSTODY OF MINOR.
Respectfully Sheweth,
1. That briefly the facts of the case in hand are that the petitioner
got married with the respondent No. 1 almost 18 years before
in accordance with Islamic Rites.
2. That out of the wedlock two children i.e. respondent No. 2&3
were born respectively, who are presently in custody of
respondent No. 1. It is pertinent to mention here that the age of
respondent No. 2 is 12 years and age of respondent No. 3 is 10
years respectively.
3. That during first couple of week, the relationship between the
spouses were cordial but thereafter the respondent No. 1
started showing his real colour. The respondent No. 1 used to
abuse and insult the petitioner on petty household matters.
4. That with the passage of time, the attitude of the respondent
No. 1 became bad to worse towards the petitioner and
ultimately the respondent No. 1 ousted the petitioner while
snatching the minors.
2
5. That it was the petitioner who many times just to save the
marital status and also to save the future of the minors tried to
reconcile but the attitude of the respondent No. 1 was never
ever changed with the petitioner and ultimately separation
took place between the parties on 19-07-2023 and divorce
effectiveness certificate was issued on 08-03-2024.
6. That since then, the respondent No. 1 yet not allowed the
petitioner to have a glance to the minors/ respondents No. 2&3
and on request used to threat for dire consequences.
7. That the respondent No. 1 is careless person and he number of
times, gave severe beating to the minors. It is also important to
mention here that respondent No.1 already divorced his first
wife and also snatched her children, and respondent No.2 & 3
are residing with their step siblings. It is also worth mentioning
fact that respondent No.1 remarriage.
8. That the welfare and proper up-bringing of minors are at stake,
hence the petitioner seeks custody of the minors inter alia on
the following:
GROUNDS
A. That the petitioner is real mother of minors and at this
stage, they have to face the hazard of lives and they need
their mother instead of irresponsible father.
B. That respondent No. 1 solemnized Third marriage with
some other lady and the respondents No. 2&3 remained
at the mercy of her step mother, who not only beaten
them but also not properly taken care of them.
C. That the respondent No. 1 is not in a position to properly
groom the minors, as he is working in a OGDCL where, he
is much busier and bound to his work that’s why he is not
giving proper time to the minors.
D. That the minors are not going to school regularly, which
is evident from the record of school and if this
Honourable Court intends to confirm the same, the court
can summon the school attendance register, due to which
the studies of minors destroyed badly, which definitely
destroy the future of minors.
3
E. That the atmosphere of the house of the respondent No.
1 is full of suffocation, so it is not possible for the minors
to brought up in the prevailing circumstances.
F. That there is no one in the house of petitioner who can
properly take care of the minors/ respondents No. 2&3,
however the petitioner who is their real mother can
easily manage both the minors and take care of them.
G. That the petitioner is capable of maintaining and brought
up of the minors in a very healthy circumstances.
H. That paramount interest of the minors lies that they be
given in the custody of the petitioner.
I. That the respondent No. 1 is living in a very small house,
where they are dwelling and in that atmosphere the
health of the children is depreciated.
J. That since the petitioner has ousted by the respondent
No. 1 from his house, the petitioner number of time got
the news of illness of the minors due to negligence of the
respondent No. 1 and it also came into the knowledge of
petitioner that minors throughout the whole day are
wandering in the streets, which badly affected the mind
of minors.
K. That the environment of the house of the respondent No.
1 is not good and the petitioner is apprehending that the
personality of the minors will be damaged from the
environment existing in the house of the respondent No.
1.
L. That it is in the paramount interest of the minors that
their custody be handed over to the petitioner. In short
the welfare of the minors lie with the petitioner.
M. That the respondent No. 1 deliberately, willfully and
intentionally has not allowed the petitioner to meet with
their minors.
N. That both the minors are very much attached with the
petitioner due to the non-interesting attitude of the
respondent No. 1 and it is not possible for the minors to
live without the petitioner in healthy manner.
4
9. That the cause of action accrued a few days earlier, when the
respondent No. 1 finally refused to allow the petitioner to meet
with her children and is still continuing.
10. That the parties are residing within the territorial limits of this
Honourable Court, hence this Honourable Court has
jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter.
11. That the prescribed court fee shall be affixed on the petition.
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the custody of the
minors/ respondents No. 2 & 3 may graciously be handed over to the
petitioner in the interest of justice.
It is further prayed that during the pendency of instant
petition, the interim custody of the minors may graciously be handed
over to the petitioner.
Any other relief, which this Honourable Court may deem fit and
proper may also be awarded to the petitioner.
Petitioner
Through
Shoaib khan Niazi Malik waseem Ahmed
Advocate High Court Advocate High Court
Verification:-
Verified on Oath at Islamabad on this day of Nov 2024, that the
contents of the above paras are true and correct to the best of our
knowledge and belief.
Petitioner
5
IN THE COURT OF GUARDIAN JUDGE/ SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
ISLAMABAD.
Mst. Samia Naz …Petitioner
Versus
Maqsood Ahmed etc …Respondents
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 25 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT
FOR THE CUSTODY OF MINOR.
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS
ACT
Respectfully Sheweth,
1. That the petitioner filed the above captioned petition before
this Honourable Court, the contents of the same may be read as
an integral part of this application.
2. That the petitioner has a strong prime facie case and hopes to
succeed in it.
3. That the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the
petitioner because she is real mother of the minors.
4. That if the interim relief is not granted to the petitioner, the
petitioner would have to suffer an irreparable loss.
It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the instant application
may be accepted and the interim custody of the minors may kindly be
handed over to the petitioner, till the final decision of the main
petition.
It is further prayed that till the decision of the application for
interim custody the petitioner may kindly be allowed to meet the
minors with the proper arrangement twicely in every month.
Petitioner
Through
Shoaib Khan Niazi
Advocate High Court
6
IN THE COURT OF GUARDIAN JUDGE, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
ISLAMABAD .
Mst. Samia Naz …Petitioner
Versus
Maqsood Ahmed etc …Respondents
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 25 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS ACT
FOR THE CUSTODY OF MINOR.
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12 OF GUARDIAN AND WARDS
ACT
AFFIDAVIT
I, Mst. Samia Naz daughter of Fazal Hussain R/o Post office Khas,
Shadiwal, chuherke, Tehsil & District Gujrat do hereby solemnly
declare as under.
That the deponent has filed above titled application before this
Honourable Court the contents of the same are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed
therein.
Deponent
Verification:
Verified on Oath that the above deposition is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Deponent
